Best way to cancel Union membership?

Andy_L

ohreally wrote: »

..........

perhaps in the 4 months between post they joined & then left. Or perhaps not...

TELLIT01

ohreally wrote: »

..........

I was never a member of a union prior to joining DWP. I joined towards the end of my time there because I thought people were being treated appallingly and actually wanted to support their strike action. That was only for a period of a few months before retirement, and I didn't actually realise that I could safely withdraw my labour for the day without being a union member. Had I realised, I wouldn't have joined even then as my aim was to support my colleagues, not put money in union coffers.

ohreally

TELLIT01 wrote: »

I didn't actually realise that I could safely withdraw my labour for the day without being a union member.

Taking industrial action without the protection of trade union mandated process comes with concomitant risk which I would not be rushing into, one is in great danger of being exposed to the employers whim by this point and exited out the door.

Xbigman

If the union was so weak they allowed a rep to be forced out I wouldn't consider being a member. I support the idea of unions but some work places have unions so poor it simply is not worth the money being paid for membership.

I was a unite member for 9 years and when I needed the union all 3 nightshift reps (who were all supposed to be on shift) had gone to a darts match, during a barred period for holidays. That was that...

Good luck to the OP whatever they decide.



Darren

pmduk

Xbigman wrote: »

If the union was so weak they allowed a rep to be forced out I wouldn't consider being a member.

Darren

Even a Union rep might break rules that the union cannot, and indeed, should not defend him from the sanctions thereof. We know none of the details.

sangie595

Xbigman wrote: »

If the union was so weak they allowed a rep to be forced out I wouldn't consider being a member. I support the idea of unions but some work places have unions so poor it simply is not worth the money being paid for membership.

I was a unite member for 9 years and when I needed the union all 3 nightshift reps (who were all supposed to be on shift) had gone to a darts match, during a barred period for holidays. That was that...

Good luck to the OP whatever they decide.



Darren

We have no idea why the union rep left - only the OPs perspective on why. Union reps, I have found, can be as stupid as anyone else - perhaps they left the employer no alternative, or just an opening if that all it needed. But I find it amusing that the majority of people on the thread judge a union by what the levels above the rep did or didn't do - which we also don't know! For all we know the rep is sitting pretty on a tribunal claim or a settlement - or rightly languishing after stealing the weeks takings!

I judge a union by what the members do - and if the members of a union allowed their employer to hound out a union rep without just cause, then decide that they want to resign because they have no union rep, well they deserve whatever comes next!

A union is as strong as its members make it. When the law offers no support (which is pretty common) then what forces employers to think again is what the members might or will do to defend their interests. If that is nothing, then the members are getting what they ask for...

TELLIT01

Although I agree with much of what Sangie says about the union (possibly for the first and only time), I think it's unfair to effectively blame local union members for the situation. We can't know how much they were aware of, although the OP's "forced out" suggests he/she knows more than has been posted here.
If they were forced out because of their union activity it must draw into question how much support they did get from other union officials. In that type of situation is it a surprise that local members were unwilling / afraid to put their heads over the parapet? or that they should feel that if the union heirarchy didn't support the rep they might be on their own in any issues with the employer?
I repeat what has been said before, we don't know the full story and it's entirely likely other employees don't know it either. In that vacuum wouldn't the thoughts outlined above regarding action/inaction by other local union members seem pretty normal? Is it reasonable to think that local union members would walk out on strike to support their fired union rep without support from the union as a whole?
These are all questions to which I don't have an answer.

sangie595

TELLIT01 wrote: »

Although I agree with much of what Sangie says about the union (possibly for the first and only time), I think it's unfair to effectively blame local union members for the situation. We can't know how much they were aware of, although the OP's "forced out" suggests he/she knows more than has been posted here.
If they were forced out because of their union activity it must draw into question how much support they did get from other union officials. In that type of situation is it a surprise that local members were unwilling / afraid to put their heads over the parapet? or that they should feel that if the union heirarchy didn't support the rep they might be on their own in any issues with the employer?
I repeat what has been said before, we don't know the full story and it's entirely likely other employees don't know it either. In that vacuum wouldn't the thoughts outlined above regarding action/inaction by other local union members seem pretty normal? Is it reasonable to think that local union members would walk out on strike to support their fired union rep without support from the union as a whole?
These are all questions to which I don't have an answer.

I don't know, as I said.. But you still have it the wrong way around. The union does not call for industrial action and the members do it. The members call for industrial action and they have to vote for it. There is no "vacuum" - the members of a union want to take action, they don't post on a forum asking how to resign. They email the union asking for an official to help them to organise the fight back against the employer who wrongfully (?) dismissed their rep. And as a UNITE official, I can confidently say that we never ignore that email...

Marvel1

sangie595 wrote: »

Whilst you are at it, you could save more money by canceling all your insurance policies. There's really no benefit in insurance to being insured since there hasn't been a house fire on your street in two decades, and nobody in the family ever crashed their car or fell sick on holiday.

When it's you that is hounded out of the workplace, you might regret your decision...

Building insurance I believe you must if you have a mortgage.

You must also have car insurance.

So I fail to see the comparision.

Manxman_in_exile

cjdavies wrote: »

Building insurance I believe you must if you have a mortgage.

You must also have car insurance.

So I fail to see the comparision.

I think I do see the comparison. Insuring your house contents is not compulsory, but I think you would be foolish not to do so unless your house contents were not worth insuring (unlike your job). It's not a perfect comparison, but I think the point is well made.


(PS - I speak as a fool who left our house contents uninsured for three years as I mistakenly thought they were covered by our house insurance - they weren't. When I realised my mistake I nearly passed out!).